Page Metadata

Item Metadata

The purpose of this study was to investigate the views of
British Columbia principals with regard to the formal
evaluation of teaching. Four major concepts were addressed
a) the purpose of evaluation; b) the process of evaluation;
c) the need for further principal training in evaluation;
and, d) obstacles to carrying out evaluation. The sex of
principals and years of experience as a principal were
identified for further analysis because these variables are
absent in the literature on formal evaluation.
The data consisted of relevant clauses from all 75
British Columbia school district collective agreements and
responses to a survey sent to the members of the British
Columbia Principals' and Vice-Principals' Association. The
achieved sample is 188 principals. The findings of this
study show the conduct of formal evaluation is a
responsibility willingly accepted by principals and that it
is a function they consider they carry out well.
Collective agreements say little about the purpose of
evaluation. The majority of principals believe the most
important purpose of evaluation is teacher growth and
development. Female principals indicate a stronger
orientation towards teacher growth and development than
males but this difference may also be related to principals'
different experience levels.
Relatively few evaluations are carried out and only a
very small proportion result in "less than satisfactory"
reports. Evaluations leading to "satisfactory" and "less
than satisfactory" reports are characterised in very
different terms by principals. Anecdotal responses support
the assertion made in the literature that principals believe
they already know who their 'weak' teachers are before
conducting an evaluation.
British Columbia principals consider time as the
primary obstacle to carrying out formal evaluation.
Evaluation cycles and site management responsibilities are
perceived as the major time consumers. Neither size of
staff nor percentage of teaching time were identified as
significant time barriers by the respondents.
Principals do not label themselves as under-trained for
the responsibility of formal evaluator of teaching.
Moreover, master's specialty and previous training are not
linked to further training needs nor to how well principals
believe they do evaluation.
Three policy recommendations emerge from this study:
(1) to re-assess the role of principal as evaluator in the
light of their wider responsibilities; (2) to consider
extending the role of formal evaluator to educators other
than school-based administrators; and (3) to re-assess the
value of formal evaluation as currently practised.

Comment

Related Items

Feedback / Report Issue

Feedback on Open Collections Website

Open Collections is an initiative to bring together locally created and managed content from the
University of British Columbia Library's open access repositories. The Library welcomes questions and
comments about Open Collections. If you notice any bugs, display issues, or data issues - or just want
to say hi - you're in the right place! Thanks for visiting Open Collections.